Ex-communist Europe

Moldova and history

Drink to me only

MOST victims of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact are pretty clear about what happened to them in 1940. But Moldova, once a province of Romania (and before that part of Czarist Russia) has taken a low-key, some would say muddled, approach to its history since 1991.

Last month the acting president, Mihai Gimpu, designated June 28th "Soviet occupation day". That infuriated Russia, which prefers to highlight Soviet sacrifice in liberating eastern Europe from fascism, rather than the Stalin-era carve-up with Hitler that preceded the war. Vladimir Socor at the Jamestown Foundation summarised the reaction:

In a commentary issued on June 25, Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs characterizes the Moldovan decree as “pseudo-history” and a move “directed against Russian-Moldovan partnership, harmful to the [Moldovan] state's national interests.” Condemning the decree as “sacrilegious” (a term previously applied to Estonia's relocation of the Red Army monument from downtown Tallinn), the Russian MFA warns of possible “confrontations in Moldova's multi-ethnic society” in this connection. Instead of a “so-called occupation,” Moscow advises Chisinau to speak about “the history that we and the Moldovan people share.” The document puts Moldova's governing Alliance for European Integration (AEI) on notice that Moscow “expect[s] pragmatic approaches to prevail in the Moldovan leadership and the AEI” (Russian MFA Commentary, Interfax, June 25).

The Duma's international affairs committee chairman, Konstantin Kosachev, characterized the Moldovan presidential decree as “idiocy” and “historical illiteracy.” Kosachev also insinuated that Ghimpu was contradicting the “international community's” position on the Russian troops in Moldova (Interfax, June 25). Well-known Russian Television pundit Vladimir Solovyov proposed calling on a “psychiatrist, to assess this document as part of Ghimpu's medical history” (Moldova Suverana, June 25).

Officials in Moscow impounded Moldovan wine imports. Russia's chief sanitary official Gennady Onishchenko said it was only good for "painting faces". He threatened a total ban on the wine, Moldova's most important export.

Moldova hastened to negotiate. And on July 12, the country's constitutional court cancelled the presidential decree, saying that Mr Ghimpu had "no authority" to institute the day.

The row comes in the run up to the referendum on September 5th which will introduce a direct election for the presidency, ending the year-long constitutional deadlock in parliament, where neither the government nor the opposition has enough votes to get a head of state elected. Keeping the economy afloat until then probably matters rather more than symbolic and divisive gestures about history, however justified and overdue some on the centre-right of Moldovan politics may find them.

Firstly, I don't deny Soviet Union helped much to defeat Nazi Germany, but their soldiers deserved to be called "beasts". Nobody remember them as liberators, most of people remember them as curse. Of course everyone knows that they didn't bring freedom but another captivity. Russian captivity was much worse than German, so I am not surprised by Moldavians. It is their right, to judge history their way. The truth is that we don't remember past as it really was, but as we think it was. Soviet soldiers left very bad memories. Nobody, except Russians and people of West (people who have never experienced them), loves them, but many hates. It is bitter but it is true. I should add that Soviet soldiers were from another world, world of Stalin's communism - system which was able to make a beast of every man. Soldiers were lied, and they believed they were going to bring other people liberty - for them liberty meant the same as communism. Sometimes it is funny when you read about Soviet soldiers' deeds when they captured Eastern Poland, as they described people what the sugar is. It was their truth, they belived in it. They were fooled by their own authorities!

Secondly, it is disgusting when Russian authorities instruct other nations to respect memory of "heroes" (heroes in Russian opnion). How should I call them when at the same time they cannot respect memory of heroes/martyrs of other nations (e.g. case of Katyń)? They accuse Moldavians of historical lies (not very true), when they commit the same crime (what can be proved) all the time.

Thirdly, creating false vision of Soviet soldiers is a part of Russian "imperial" policy. Is a part of lying Russians by their own authirities as Soviet authorities lied Soviet citizens. I must condemn it.

Fourthly, (with reference to part from "Officials in Moscow..." to "...to institute the day") I must mention the fact of forcing opponents to change their minds by Russians. It is worth condemning. They impounded Moldovian wine imports, as they banned Polish meat few years ago. Where is Moldovian independence, when other country can change their decisions? Russians are tramplng on other nations' dignity, and it will be revenged one day. They cannot offend their neighbours and other nations from their "interest zone" without any consequence.

All these things and many other shows barbarian policy of Russia. One they brute force wouldn't be enough to enslave other nations, and this day will be the end of "the third Rome" dream. As I wrote in another discussion: anger and powerlessness gives hate. Russians treat other nations that they cause anger, their power makes these nations powerless, so why they are surprised that they are hated? People can suffer many offences, but if they only could they would take revenge on their offenders. I think Russian policy is going to destroy Russia. But it is problem of Russians that their authorities are fools. For now most of Russian neighbours are secretive or not Russian enemies. I totally support them.

Ghimpu seems to be following the Yushchenko school of 'antagonise Russia'. I think actually the Moldovans would be on safer ground looking pre-war and resorting to Romanian nationalism. After all, it's difficult to argue that the 'shared history' of the Russian and Molovan people is a stronger bond than the infinitely deeper shared history and language of Romania and Moldova. What would happen if the Moldovans scrapped the 'Lmibra Nostra' idea and declared that the national language was Romanian and that Moldova was part of Romania's historical and legitimate sphere of influence? It's difficult to see how bogus Soviet bonds would have a stronger claim.

The real audience for Ghimpu's decree was not Russia, nor the communist opposition, but the rural poor who have been brainwashed by Stalinist propaganda about the war for the best part of seventy years. Many of them are hearing for the first time that Moldova was occupied rather than liberated.

Russia has completely overreacted and has failed to offer a single substantiated argument against the decree, which simply says the following:
1. The Soviet Union invaded
2. Hundreds of thousands of Moldovans lost their lives in the occupation and should be commemorated
3. Russia should withdraw its troops from Transnistria

(1) is a historic fact. (2) is the only humanly decent response to tragedy and Russia itself committed to (3) under the CFE treaty at Istanbul in 2000. The Russians don't have a leg to stand on.

At that time, 28th of june 1940, there was no sight of nazis in or around Bessarabia. The nazis were busy occupying Poland, bashing France and other nazi-like activities conducted in accordance and compliance with the soviets as they signed the Ribentrop-Moltov pact.
So whom did the soviets liberated Bessarabia from, since there were no nazis around?
And further more, “liberation” implies a state of at least nervousness between the Liberator and the Opressor, which was nowhere to be seen since the two parties were happily and harmoniously signing treaties and carving up cuntries.

Related Moldova’s stronger orientation toward EU and Romania there is the approachment of Ukraine to Russia.
In order to make the new pro-Russia policy more palatable to ordinary ukrainians, ukrainian politicians and media have resurfaced a handy external enemy: Romania.
If you read the ukrainian press you get the feeling Romania is intensifying its up to no good actions regarding Ukraine.
Take for instance the floods that affected the whole of Eastern Europe in the last month. The breaches in the dams made by the romanians in order to relief the flooded areas were depicted as intentional subversive attempts to clog some ukrainian canal.
The Roentgen devices put in place at the border by the romanians were seen as “another attack” meant to slow the traffic and perform devilish actions, forgeting that the Roentgens are part of a strategy elaborated by the EU, and put in place at the request of the EU because Romania is about to join Schengen in 2011.
Then, there is Danube, a river that, just like all rivers, changes its river bed from time to time, shifting hundred of meters or kilometers. The trouble is this time changed its course into the ukrainian side and shifted a small unimportant island closer to the romanian side. Internationally the borders on rivers are established on the main river bed. When the river bed shifts, the border shifts too. But the ukrainians don’t want to hear anything about it. For them it’s just a plot to rob them enacted by Romania. As if the Danube could shift its course on purpose in order to upset the ukrainians.
And since they lost the Hague tribunal trial for the Black Sea bed, they don’t want to hear anything about international mediation.
Even before the elections, both the pro-russian and pro-western candidates were having a a “let’s bash Romania” party to get votes. That nationalistic approach of Timosenko and Yuscenko pushed the romanian minority (and the hungarians too) to make un unexpected choice and back the pro-russian candidate.
Up to a point is quite hillarious to read these absurdities. And even understandable. I mean, if you have a crisis that lowers national GDP by 15%, disgruntled masses, difficult political re-orientation towards Russia, you need a fabricated foreign threat to distract attention. It is taken from the manual. Once or twice is funny but then again and again and again?

Thanks for publishing the links on the Wikkipedia record of the Soviet historical falsifications. There are even today Russia ultra-patriots who are trying to peddle the falsified versions among the ignorant or uninformed.

lol demonizing Russia is the main hobby of European nationalists, soon we will find out that 'the brave Nazi soldiers were just protecting Europe from communism' (unfortunately I've already seen this phrase used in a TV documentary) I'm sure this would be the prevailing narrative about WW2 already if it wasn't for Auschwitz.

Regarding your 'brave' reference to Auschwitz, have you ever thought about the fact the the Auschwitz concentration camp, one of several built after the 1939 Nazi invasion of Poland, had existed for less than five years while the Soviet Gulag camps, initially built shortly after the communist October 1917 revolution, stretched all the way from the Archangelsk to Kolyma and beyond and were in continuous operation by the Moscow Main Camp Admonistration ( "Glavnoye Upravlenye Lagerov" = GULAG) well into the 1960s, or more like 45 years ! While the Nazi crimes have been exposed and condemned, those perpetrated by the Russian communists are kept in Kremlin's secret archives.